It seems singular that, as so much has been written about tigers, there should be any dispute as to the way in which the tiger usually seizes its prey, but I find that Mr. Sanderson differs widely from Captain Forsyth, and Captain Baldwin and others, and says that, though the tiger does occasionally seize by the nape of the neck in the case of his having to deal with very powerful animals, his usual method is to seize by the throat; and another sportsman of great experience tells me that, though he has seen hundreds of kills, the seizure was always by the throat.  In my part of the country it is so much the usual method for the tiger to seize by the nape of the neck, that a native, when asked if he is sure that it was a tiger and not a panther, always puts his hand to the back of his neck, and if he says that the animal was seized by the throat, we invariably assume that the seizer is a panther.  As Mr. Sanderson was a most careful observer, I cannot doubt the correctness of his experience, and as little can I doubt the experience in my neighbourhood.  But this apparent discrepancy may easily be explained, and I regard it as probable, or even quite certain, that tigers may vary their method of attack in accordance as they live mainly on game or mainly on village cattle.  In the case of a bison, a wild boar, or of a large and powerful village buffalo, Mr. Sanderson admits that the seizure is by the nape of the neck, and that no doubt is the rule with the forest tigers, such as those that have been killed near my estate, and which have lived mostly upon game, but I can easily conceive that tigers that have lived on village cattle would attack in a different way.

There is also another difference between Mr. Sanderson and other sportsmen as to the tiger killing animals with a blow of its paw.  Mr. Sanderson does not in the least believe that the paw is so used, but Captain Williamson[18] considers the paw as “the invariable engine of destruction.”  “I have seen,” he says, “many men and oxen that had been killed by tigers, in most of which no mark of a claw could be seen.”  I have not paid much attention to this subject, but I do recollect one instance of a bullock that had been killed by a blow of the paw, as I remember being struck by the fact that there was no apparent cause of death, but on a closer examination I found a wide bruise, evidently from the tiger’s paw, on the side of the head.  A friend of mine of great experience tells me that he has known of animals being killed by a blow of the paw.  That men are commonly killed by a blow of the paw on the head I have little doubt.  Captain Williamson mentions a case that occurred in his presence, and I knew of a doctor who had examined seven bodies, and in each case the skull had been fractured by a blow of the paw.  General Rice,[19] when giving an account of the seizure of Cornet Elliot, mentions that he had a narrow escape from a blow of the tigress’s paw, which he guarded off with his uplifted rifle.  The stock of the rifle was marked with the claws, while the trigger and guard were knocked completely flat on one side, so that the gun was useless until repaired.  There is no doubt, then, that the tiger can, and does sometimes, use his paw with deadly effect, though I have little doubt that he prefers to use his teeth, as the shock of a blow to the paw must, in the case of a bullock at any rate, be very considerable.